Global health for rare diseases through primary care.

Rare diseases affect over 300 million people worldwide and are gaining recognition as a global health priority. Their inclusion in the UN Sustainable Development Goals, the UN Resolution on Addressing the Challenges of Persons Living with a Rare Disease, and the anticipated WHO Global Network for Rare Diseases and WHO Resolution on Rare Diseases, which is yet to be announced, emphasise their significance. People with rare diseases often face unmet health needs, including access to screening, diagnosis, therapy, and comprehensive health care. These challenges highlight the need for awareness and targeted interventions, including comprehensive education, especially in primary care. The majority of rare disease research, clinical services, and health systems are addressed with specialist care. WHO Member States have committed to focusing on primary health care in both universal health coverage and health-related Sustainable Development Goals. Recognising this opportunity, the International Rare Diseases Research Consortium (IRDiRC) assembled a global, multistakeholder task force to identify key barriers and opportunities for empowering primary health-care providers in addressing rare disease challenges.

Integrated Measure of PRogram Element SuStainability in Childcare Settings (IMPRESS-C): development and psychometric evaluation of a measure of sustainability determinants in the early childhood education and care setting.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for valid and reliable measures of determinants of sustainability of public health interventions in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings. This study aimed to develop and evaluate the psychometric and pragmatic properties of such a measure - the Integrated Measure of PRogram Element SuStainability in Childcare Settings (IMPRESS-C). METHODS: We undertook a two-phase process guided by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments checklist (COSMIN) and Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale (PAPERS). Phase 1 involved measure development; i.e., determining items and scales through an iterative process and assessment of face and content validity. Phase 2 involved the evaluation of psychometric and pragmatic properties. The 29-item measure completed by service executives (directors and nominated supervisors) was embedded in a larger survey from a national sample of Australian ECEC services assessing their implementation of nutrition and physical activity programs. Structural validity, concurrent validity, known groups validity, internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, norms, and pragmatic qualities of the measure were assessed according to the PAPERS criteria. RESULTS: The final measure contained 26 items, with respondents reporting how strongly they agreed or disagreed on a five-point Likert scale. Phase 1 assessments confirmed the relevance, and face and content validity of the scale. In Phase 2, we obtained 482 completed surveys, of which 84% (n = 405) completed the entire measure across 405 ECEC settings (one executive per service). Three of the four fit indices for the confirmatory factor analysis met the pre-specified criteria (SRMR = 0.056, CFI = 0.993, RMSEA = 0.067) indicating 'good' structural validity. The IMPRESS-C illustrated: 'good' internal consistency, with Cronbach's alpha values from 0.53 to 0.92; 'emerging' concurrent validity; 'poor' known groups validity; 'good' norms; and 'good' overall pragmatic qualities (cost, readability, length, and assessor burden). CONCLUSIONS: The IMPRESS-C possesses strong psychometric and pragmatic qualities for assessing service executive-level perceptions of determinants influencing sustainment of public health interventions within ECEC settings. To achieve a full range of perspectives in this setting, future work should be directed to also develop and test measures of sustainability determinants at the implementer level (e.g., among individual educators and staff).

Assessing the scalability of evidence-based healthy eating and physical activity interventions in early childhood education and care: A cross-sectional study of end-user perspectives.

OBJECTIVES: To describe early childhood education and care (ECEC) services: i) perceptions regarding the scalability of healthy eating and physical activity interventions; and ii) associations between scalability and service characteristics. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with a randomly selected sample of ECEC services across Australia. The scalability of 12 healthy eating and physical activity interventions was assessed using items based on the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool. Higher scores represented higher perceived scalability. RESULTS: From 453 participants, the highest scoring healthy eating and physical activity interventions were 'providing healthy eating education and activities for children' (M43.05) (out of 50) and 'providing sufficient opportunities for child physical activity' (M41.43). The lowest scoring was 'providing families with lunchbox guidelines' (M38.99) and 'engaging families in activities to increase child physical activity' (M38.36). Services located in rural areas, compared to urban areas, scored the overall scalability of both healthy eating and physical activity interventions significantly lower. CONCLUSIONS: Perceptions regarding the scalability of healthy eating and physical activity interventions in the ECEC setting vary according to service characteristics. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Findings identify where government investment and implementation efforts may be prioritised to facilitate scale-up. An investigation into the barriers and support required for lower-scoring interventions is warranted.

A rapid review of the scalability of interventions targeting obesity prevention in infants.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Obesity in children is one of the most significant public health issues globally. Given the high prevalence of overweight and obesity in children, there is a need to identify effective obesity prevention efforts that can be delivered at scale to improve child health. We aimed to (i) identify obesity prevention interventions targeted at children aged 0-2 that have been scaled-up, and their relative efficacy compared to their pre-scale trial, (ii) describe adaptations made, and the extent to which factors related to scalability have been reported. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review of pre-scale randomised controlled trials targeting nutrition, physical activity and obesity prevention in infants, and calculated the relative effect size for relevant outcomes in the corresponding scaled up trial. We documented adaptations made to the pre-scale trial for scale up, and explored how different components of scalability had been reported according to the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool. RESULTS: Of the 14 identified pre-scale trials, only one formal evaluation of the scale-up trial was identified. For body mass index, <10% of the effect was retained, however for nutrition and behavioural outcomes, the proportion of effect retained varied from -11.1% to 144%. Significant adaptations to modality were made in the scaled up trial primarily to reduce cost and increase reach of the intervention. Reporting of scalability components varied across the 14 trials, with only one trial reporting information for all assessed components. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of effective interventions targeting obesity prevention in infants have not been evaluated in a scaled up form. The magnitude of effect retained for the single trial that was scaled up was variable. In general, reporting of components of scalability was sub-optimal. SO WHAT?: The findings suggest that there is substantial need for the development and rigorous evaluation of obesity prevention interventions in children aged 0-2 which are amenable for scale.

The Effectiveness of Strategies to Improve User Engagement With Digital Health Interventions Targeting Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Overweight and Obesity: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Digital health interventions (DHIs) are effective in improving poor nutrition, physical inactivity, overweight and obesity. There is evidence suggesting that the impact of DHIs may be enhanced by improving user engagement. However, little is known about the overall effectiveness of strategies on engagement with DHIs. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the overall effectiveness of strategies to improve engagement with DHIs targeting nutrition, physical activity, and overweight or obesity and explore associations between strategies and engagement outcomes. The secondary aim was to explore the impact of these strategies on health risk outcomes. METHODS: The MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Academic Source Complete databases were searched up to July 24, 2023. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that evaluated strategies to improve engagement with DHIs and reported on outcomes related to DHI engagement (use or user experience). Strategies were classified according to behavior change techniques (BCTs) and design features (eg, supplementary emails). Multiple-variable meta-analyses of the primary outcomes (usage and user experience) were undertaken to assess the overall effectiveness of strategies. Meta-regressions were conducted to assess associations between strategies and use and user experience outcomes. Synthesis of secondary outcomes followed the "Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis" guidelines. The methodological quality and evidence was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool respectively. RESULTS: Overall, 54 studies (across 62 publications) were included. Pooled analysis found very low-certainty evidence of a small-to-moderate positive effect of the use of strategies to improve DHI use (standardized mean difference=0.33, 95% CI 0.20-0.46; P<.001) and very low-certainty evidence of a small-to-moderate positive effect on user experience (standardized mean difference=0.29, 95% CI 0.07-0.52; P=.01). A significant positive association was found between the BCTs social support (effect size [ES]=0.40, 95% CI 0.14-0.66; P<.001) and shaping knowledge (ES=0.39, 95% CI 0.03-0.74; P=.03) and DHI use. A significant positive association was found among the BCTs social support (ES=0.70, 95% CI 0.18-1.22; P=.01), repetition and substitution (ES=0.29, 95% CI 0.05-0.53; P=.03), and natural consequences (ES=0.29, 95% CI 0.05-0.53; P=.02); the design features email (ES=0.29, 95% CI 0.05-0.53; P=.02) and SMS text messages (ES=0.34, 95% CI 0.11-0.57; P=.01); and DHI user experience. For secondary outcomes, 47% (7/15) of nutrition-related, 73% (24/33) of physical activity-related, and 41% (14/34) of overweight- and obesity-related outcomes reported an improvement in health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although findings suggest that the use of strategies may improve engagement with DHIs targeting such health outcomes, the true effect is unknown because of the low quality of evidence. Future research exploring whether specific forms of social support, repetition and substitution, natural consequences, emails, and SMS text messages have a greater impact on DHI engagement is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42018077333; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=77333.

Assessing the scalability of healthy eating interventions within the early childhood education and care setting: secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: Early childhood education and care (ECEC) is a recommended setting for the delivery of health eating interventions 'at scale' (i.e. to large numbers of childcare services) to improve child public health nutrition. Appraisal of the 'scalability' (suitability for delivery at scale) of interventions is recommended to guide public health decision-making. This study describes the extent to which factors required to assess scalability are reported among ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. DESIGN: Studies from a recent Cochrane systematic review assessing the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC for improving child dietary intake were included. The reporting of factors of scalability was assessed against domains outlined within the Intervention Scalability Assessment Tool (ISAT). The tool recommends decision makers consider the problem, the intervention, strategic and political context, effectiveness, costs, fidelity and adaptation, reach and acceptability, delivery setting and workforce, implementation infrastructure and sustainability. Data were extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second reviewer. SETTING: ECEC. PARTICIPANTS: Children 6 months to 6 years. RESULTS: Of thirty-eight included studies, none reported all factors within the ISAT. All studies reported the problem, the intervention, effectiveness and the delivery workforce and setting. The lowest reported domains were intervention costs (13 % of studies) and sustainability (16 % of studies). CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate there is a lack of reporting of some key factors of scalability for ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. Future studies should measure and report such factors to support policy and practice decision makers when selecting interventions to be scaled-up.

Dissemination of public health research evidence and guidelines to Australian Early Childhood Education and Care staff: Views about source, content and format.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Effective dissemination of public health research and evidence-based guidelines to Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) staff is critical for promoting research transfer and uptake and achieving positive outcomes for children. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted during August 2021 to March 2022, with a sub-sample of Australian ECEC services participating in a larger survey completed online and via Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview. Survey items assessed: influential source for receiving research, type of content that would influence decisions to adopt research and preferred formats for receiving research. RESULTS: Overall, 993 service managers or staff from 1984 (50.0%) invited and eligible services completed the larger survey. Of these, 463 randomly allocated services (46.7%) had staff complete the dissemination items. The Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority, ECEC agencies and Government Departments were most frequently selected as influential sources of research evidence. Staff were most interested in content providing evidence-based recommendations for future actions and descriptions of health issues addressed. Workshops or conferences and webinars were the preferred format for receiving research. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the importance of tailoring dissemination strategies to meet ECEC staff needs and engaging influential sources to disseminate research evidence. SO WHAT?: Understanding dissemination preferences of ECEC staff is crucial for supporting uptake of evidence-based health promotion in this setting. By developing tailored strategies based on ECEC preferences, research transfer and evidence-based decision making can be supported more effectively. These findings contribute to bridging the evidence-practice gap and improving the quality of care and health outcomes for children in ECEC settings.

Implementation of healthy eating and physical activity practices in Australian early childhood education and care services: A cross-sectional study.

Background: The monitoring of healthy eating and physical activity environments is recommended to support population health. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are a key setting to deliver obesity prevention strategies as they reach the majority of children aged under five years and have existing supporting infrastructure. Objectives: The aim of this study was to i) describe the prevalence of implementation of evidence-based healthy eating and physical activity practices in an Australian sample of ECEC services, and ii) examine associations between implementation of practices and service characteristics. Methods: A random sample of 2,100 centre-based ECEC services across Australia were invited to participate in a cross-sectional survey online or via telephone (August 2021-April 2022). Service characteristics and implementation of 18 evidence-based healthy eating and physical activity practices were assessed. Descriptive statistics and linear mixed regression analyses were performed. Results: A total of 1,028 (51.8%) eligible services participated. The healthy eating and physical activity practices with the lowest prevalence of implementation were related to encouraging children to consume age-appropriate beverages (17.9%) and providing families with child physical activity education via workshops or meetings (14.6%), respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in the implementation of healthy eating practices by service characteristics, with long day care services implementing significantly more practices than preschools (p < 0.01). Conclusion: There is room to improve the implementation of evidence-based healthy eating and physical activity practices ECEC services. Implementation efforts should be directed towards preschools.

Healthy eating interventions delivered in early childhood education and care settings for improving the diet of children aged six months to six years.

BACKGROUND: Dietary intake during early childhood can have implications on child health and developmental trajectories. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are recommended settings to deliver healthy eating interventions as they provide access to many children during this important period. Healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings can include strategies targeting the curriculum (e.g. nutrition education), ethos and environment (e.g. menu modification) and partnerships (e.g. workshops for families). Despite guidelines supporting the delivery of healthy eating interventions in this setting, little is known about their impact on child health. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings for improving dietary intake in children aged six months to six years, relative to usual care, no intervention or an alternative, non-dietary intervention. Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on physical outcomes (e.g. child body mass index (BMI), weight, waist circumference), language and cognitive outcomes, social/emotional and quality-of-life outcomes. We also report on cost and adverse consequences of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched eight electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Scopus and SportDiscus on 24 February 2022. We searched reference lists of included studies, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar, and contacted authors of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-RCTs, stepped-wedge RCTs, factorial RCTs, multiple baseline RCTs and randomised cross-over trials, of healthy eating interventions targeting children aged six months to six years that were conducted within the ECEC setting. ECEC settings included preschools, nurseries, kindergartens, long day care and family day care. To be included, studies had to include at least one intervention component targeting child diet within the ECEC setting and measure child dietary or physical outcomes, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted study data. We assessed risk of bias for all studies against 12 criteria within RoB 1, which allows for consideration of how selection, performance, attrition, publication and reporting biases impact outcomes. We resolved discrepancies via consensus or by consulting a third review author. Where we identified studies with suitable data and homogeneity, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model; otherwise, we described findings using vote-counting approaches and via harvest plots. For measures with similar metrics, we calculated mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for primary and secondary outcomes where studies used different measures. We applied GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for dietary, cost and adverse outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included 52 studies that investigated 58 interventions (described across 96 articles). All studies were cluster-RCTs. Twenty-nine studies were large (≥ 400 participants) and 23 were small (< 400 participants). Of the 58 interventions, 43 targeted curriculum, 56 targeted ethos and environment, and 50 targeted partnerships. Thirty-eight interventions incorporated all three components. For the primary outcomes (dietary outcomes), we assessed 19 studies as overall high risk of bias, with performance and detection bias being most commonly judged as high risk of bias. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions versus usual practice or no intervention may have a positive effect on child diet quality (SMD 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.65; P = 0.03, I2 = 91%; 6 studies, 1973 children) but the evidence is very uncertain. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely increase children's consumption of fruit (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.18; P < 0.01, I2 = 0%; 11 studies, 2901 children). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on children's consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.25; P =0.08, I2 = 70%; 13 studies, 3335 children). There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely result in little to no difference in children's consumption of non-core (i.e. less healthy/discretionary) foods (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.08; P = 0.48, I2 = 16%; 7 studies, 1369 children) or consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.14; P = 0.41, I2 = 45%; 3 studies, 522 children). Thirty-six studies measured BMI, BMI z-score, weight, overweight and obesity, or waist circumference, or a combination of some or all of these. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child BMI (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07; P = 0.30, I2 = 65%; 15 studies, 3932 children) or in child BMI z-score (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.03; P = 0.36, I2 = 0%; 17 studies; 4766 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may decrease child weight (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03; P = 0.09, I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 2071 children) and risk of overweight and obesity (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1070 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may be cost-effective but the evidence is very uncertain (6 studies). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may have little to no effect on adverse consequences but the evidence is very uncertain (3 studies). Few studies measured language and cognitive skills (n = 2), social/emotional outcomes (n = 2) and quality of life (n = 3). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may improve child diet quality slightly, but the evidence is very uncertain, and likely increase child fruit consumption slightly. There is uncertainty about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on vegetable consumption. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child consumption of non-core foods and sugar-sweetened beverages. Healthy eating interventions could have favourable effects on child weight and risk of overweight and obesity, although there was little to no difference in BMI and BMI z-scores. Future studies exploring the impact of specific intervention components, and describing cost-effectiveness and adverse outcomes are needed to better understand how to maximise the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.

Healthy eating interventions delivered in early childhood education and care settings for improving the diet of children aged six months to six years.

BACKGROUND: Dietary intake during early childhood can have implications on child health and developmental trajectories. Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are recommended settings to deliver healthy eating interventions as they provide access to many children during this important period. Healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings can include strategies targeting the curriculum (e.g. nutrition education), ethos and environment (e.g. menu modification) and partnerships (e.g. workshops for families). Despite guidelines supporting the delivery of healthy eating interventions in this setting, little is known about their impact on child health. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of healthy eating interventions delivered in ECEC settings for improving dietary intake in children aged six months to six years, relative to usual care, no intervention or an alternative, non-dietary intervention. Secondary objectives were to assess the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on physical outcomes (e.g. child body mass index (BMI), weight, waist circumference), language and cognitive outcomes, social/emotional and quality-of-life outcomes. We also report on cost and adverse consequences of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched eight electronic databases including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Scopus and SportDiscus on 24 February 2022. We searched reference lists of included studies, reference lists of relevant systematic reviews, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar, and contacted authors of relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), including cluster-RCTs, stepped-wedge RCTs, factorial RCTs, multiple baseline RCTs and randomised cross-over trials, of healthy eating interventions targeting children aged six months to six years that were conducted within the ECEC setting. ECEC settings included preschools, nurseries, kindergartens, long day care and family day care. To be included, studies had to include at least one intervention component targeting child diet within the ECEC setting and measure child dietary or physical outcomes, or both. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of review authors independently screened titles and abstracts and extracted study data. We assessed risk of bias for all studies against 12 criteria within RoB 1, which allows for consideration of how selection, performance, attrition, publication and reporting biases impact outcomes. We resolved discrepancies via consensus or by consulting a third review author. Where we identified studies with suitable data and homogeneity, we performed meta-analyses using a random-effects model; otherwise, we described findings using vote-counting approaches and via harvest plots. For measures with similar metrics, we calculated mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes. We calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) for primary and secondary outcomes where studies used different measures. We applied GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for dietary, cost and adverse outcomes.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 52 studies that investigated 58 interventions (described across 96 articles). All studies were cluster-RCTs. Twenty-nine studies were large (≥ 400 participants) and 23 were small (< 400 participants). Of the 58 interventions, 43 targeted curriculum, 56 targeted ethos and environment, and 50 targeted partnerships. Thirty-eight interventions incorporated all three components. For the primary outcomes (dietary outcomes), we assessed 19 studies as overall high risk of bias, with performance and detection bias being most commonly judged as high risk of bias. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions versus usual practice or no intervention may have a positive effect on child diet quality (SMD 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.65; P = 0.03, I2 = 91%; 6 studies, 1973 children) but the evidence is very uncertain. There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely increase children's consumption of fruit (SMD 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.18; P < 0.01, I2 = 0%; 11 studies, 2901 children). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on children's consumption of vegetables (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.25; P =0.08, I2 = 70%; 13 studies, 3335 children). There is moderate-certainty evidence that ECEC-based healthy eating interventions likely result in little to no difference in children's consumption of non-core (i.e. less healthy/discretionary) foods (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.17 to 0.08; P = 0.48, I2 = 16%; 7 studies, 1369 children) or consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.14; P = 0.41, I2 = 45%; 3 studies, 522 children). Thirty-six studies measured BMI, BMI z-score, weight, overweight and obesity, or waist circumference, or a combination of some or all of these. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child BMI (MD -0.08, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.07; P = 0.30, I2 = 65%; 15 studies, 3932 children) or in child BMI z-score (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.09 to 0.03; P = 0.36, I2 = 0%; 17 studies; 4766 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may decrease child weight (MD -0.23, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.03; P = 0.09, I2 = 0%; 9 studies, 2071 children) and risk of overweight and obesity (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.01; P = 0.07, I2 = 0%; 5 studies, 1070 children). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may be cost-effective but the evidence is very uncertain (6 studies). ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may have little to no effect on adverse consequences but the evidence is very uncertain (3 studies). Few studies measured language and cognitive skills (n = 2), social/emotional outcomes (n = 2) and quality of life (n = 3). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may improve child diet quality slightly, but the evidence is very uncertain, and likely increase child fruit consumption slightly. There is uncertainty about the effect of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions on vegetable consumption. ECEC-based healthy eating interventions may result in little to no difference in child consumption of non-core foods and sugar-sweetened beverages. Healthy eating interventions could have favourable effects on child weight and risk of overweight and obesity, although there was little to no difference in BMI and BMI z-scores. Future studies exploring the impact of specific intervention components, and describing cost-effectiveness and adverse outcomes are needed to better understand how to maximise the impact of ECEC-based healthy eating interventions.

A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial to Increase the Sustainment of an Indoor-Outdoor-Free-Play Program in Early Childhood Education and Care Services: A Study Protocol for the Sustaining Play, Sustaining Health (SPSH) Trial.

Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) settings are important environments to support children's physical activity (PA). In 2021, COVID-19 regulations recommended the provision of indoor-outdoor free-play programs in ECEC settings to reduce the transmission of COVID-19, resulting in an increased uptake of this practice. As the context has since changed, research suggests that ECEC services could cease the implementation of these practices. Therefore, this pilot randomised controlled trial (RCT) aims to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and impact of a sustainment strategy to ensure the ongoing implementation (sustainment) of ECEC-delivered indoor-outdoor free-play programs. Twenty ECEC services located in New South Wales, Australia that have implemented indoor-outdoor free-play programs since the release of COVID-19 guidelines will be recruited. The services will be randomly allocated either the sustainment strategy or usual care. The "Sustaining Play, Sustaining Health" program consists of eight strategies, developed to address key barriers against and facilitators of sustainment informed by the Integrated Sustainability Framework. The outcomes will be assessed via internal project records, staff surveys, and a self-reported measure of free play. This study will provide important data to support the performance of a fully powered trial within Australian ECEC settings and to inform the development of future sustainment strategies.

Parent-reported compared with researcher-measured child height and weight: impact on body mass index classification in Australian pre-school aged children.

ISSUE ADDRESSED: Parent-reported data may provide a practical and cheap way for estimating young children's weight status. This study aims to compare the validity and reliability of parent-reported height and weight to researcher-measured data for pre-school aged children (aged 2-6 years). METHODS: This was a nested study within a cluster randomised controlled trial (October 2016-April 2017), conducted within 32 Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) services across New South Wales, Australia. Parents of children reported on demographics and child height and weight via a survey. For the same child, height and weight data were objectively collected by trained research staff at the service. We calculated mean differences, intra-class correlations, Bland-Altman plots, percentage agreement and Cohen's kappa coefficient (>0.8 = "excellent"; 0.61-0.8 = "good"; 0.41-0.60 = "moderate"; 0.21 and 0.4 = "fair [weak]"; <0.2 = "poor"). RESULTS: Overall, 89 children were included (mean age: 4.7 years; 59.5% female). The mean difference between parent-reported and researcher-measured data were small (BMI z-score: mean difference -0.01 [95% CI: -0.45 to 0.44]). There was "fair/weak" agreement between parent-categorised child BMI compared with researcher-measured data (Cohen's Kappa 0.24 [95% CI: 0.06 to 0.42]). Agreement was poor (Cohen's kappa <0.2) for female children, when reported by fathers or by parents with a BMI > 25 kg/m2 . CONCLUSION: There was "fair/weak" agreement between parent-reported and measured estimates of child weight status. SO WHAT?: Parent's report of weight and height may be a weak indicator of adiposity at the level of individuals however it may be useful for aggregate estimates.

Describing the evidence-base for research engagement by health care providers and health care organisations: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Having a research-engaged health and medical workforce is associated with improvements in clinical outcomes for patients. As such, there has been significant government investment internationally to support health care organisations and services to increase staff engagement with research. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review sought to provide an overview of the literature describing strategies employed to increase research engagement by health care providers and organisations, and to undertake a qualitative analysis to generate a list of research engagement strategies. METHODS: A scoping review using systematic search strategies was undertaken to locate peer-review publications and grey literature related to research engagement by health care providers and organisations. Research engagement was defined as a 'deliberate set of intellectual and practical activities undertaken by health care staff and organisations to conduct research'. A database search of electronic records was performed with no limit on publication date. Publications were included regardless of study type (excluding systematic reviews) and categorised as either databased (presenting data or new analysis of existing data) and non-databased (no new data or analyses). Databased publications were further classified according to study type, study design and setting. A qualitative synthesis using a Framework Approach was undertaken with all studies that described a strategy to improve research engagement. RESULTS: A total of 152 publications were included in this study with 54% categorised as non-databased. Of the databased articles, the majority (72%) were descriptive studies describing prevalence of correlates of research engagement, 17 (25%) described intervention studies where only two were controlled studies. The following research engagement strategies were identified: i) dual skilled team/staff, ii) resources or physical infrastructure, iii) incentives, iv) leadership support of research, v) education/training, vi) networks, vii) forming partnerships or collaborations and viii) overall leadership structure of entity. CONCLUSIONS: The literature on research engagement is primarily opinion-based and descriptive in nature. To provide the evidence needed to inform strategies, this needs to progress beyond descriptive to more rigorous well-designed intervention research.

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of healthy eating, physical activity and obesity prevention policies, practices or programs in family day care: A mixed method systematic review.

Family day care (FDC) services provide care to young children typically within the carer's own home and represents a unique setting to deliver public health programs to improve child health. To support the implementation of programs targeting healthy eating, physical activity and obesity prevention in the FDC setting, an understanding of the factors influencing their implementation is required. This mixed methods systematic review aimed to describe the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of healthy eating, physical activity or obesity prevention policies, practices and programs (hereafter referred to as programs) in the FDC setting, and synthesise these according to the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Electronic searches were conducted in 7 databases up to July 2020 to identify studies reporting the barriers and/or facilitators to program implementation in the FDC setting. Methodological quality assessments of included studies were conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Twenty studies met the review inclusion criteria (12 qualitative, 6 quantitative, 2 mixed methods). Of the 20 included studies, 16 reported barriers and facilitators mapped to the 'environmental contexts and resources' TDF domain; 10 reported barriers mapped to the 'social influences' TDF domain. Ten of the 12 qualitative studies and none of the quantitative or mixed method studies met all relevant MMAT criteria. This review comprehensively describes barriers and facilitators that need to be addressed to improve the implementation of healthy eating, physical activity and obesity prevention programs in FDC to ensure the expected health benefits of such programs reach children attending FDC.

A randomised controlled trial of an implementation strategy delivered at scale to increase outdoor free play opportunities in early childhood education and care (ECEC) services: a study protocol for the get outside get active (GOGA) trial.

BACKGROUND: Increased outdoor play time in young children is associated with many health and developmental benefits. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a multi-strategy implementation strategy delivered at scale, to increase opportunities for outdoor free play in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) services. METHODS: The study will employ a parallel-group randomised controlled trial design. One hundred ECEC services in the Hunter New England region of New South Wales, Australia, will be recruited and randomised to receive either a 6-month implementation strategy or usual care. The trial will seek to increase the implementation of an indoor-outdoor routine (whereby children are allowed to move freely between indoor and outdoor spaces during periods of free play), to increase their opportunity to engage in outdoor free play. Development of the strategy was informed by the Behaviour Change Wheel to address determinants identified in the Theoretical Domains Framework. ECEC services allocated to the control group will receive 'usual' implementation support delivered as part of state-wide obesity prevention programs. The primary trial outcome is the mean minutes/day (calculated across 5 consecutive days) of outdoor free play opportunities provided in ECEC services measured at baseline, 6-months (primary end point) and 18-months post baseline. Analyses will be performed using an intention-to-treat approach with ECEC services as the unit of analysis, using a linear mixed effects regression model to assess between-group differences. A sensitivity analysis will be undertaken, adjusting for service characteristics that appear imbalanced between groups at baseline, and a subgroup analysis examining potential intervention effect among services with the lowest baseline outdoor free play opportunities. DISCUSSION: Identifying effective strategies to support the implementation of indoor-outdoor routines in the ECEC setting at scale is essential to improve child population health. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12621000987864 ). Prospectively registered 27th July 2021, ANZCTR - Registration.

The benefits of data sharing and ensuring open sources of systematic review data.

AIMS: The benefits of increasing public access to data from clinical trials are widely accepted. Such benefits extend to the sharing of data from high-quality systematic reviews, given the time and cost involved with undertaking reviews. We describe the application of open sources of review data, outline potential challenges and highlight efforts made to address these challenges, with the intent of encouraging publishers, funders and authors to consider sharing review data more broadly. RESULTS: We describe the application of systematic review data in: (i) advancing understanding of clinical trials and systematic review methods, (ii) repurposing of data to answer public health policy and practice relevant questions, (iii) identification of research gaps and (iv) accelerating the conduct of rapid reviews to inform decision making. While access, logistical, motivational and legal challenges exist, there has been progress made by systematic review, academic and funding agencies to incentivise data sharing and create infrastructure to support greater access to systematic review data. CONCLUSION: There is opportunity to maximize the benefits of research investment in undertaking systematic reviews by ensuring open sources of systematic review data. Efforts to create such systems should draw on learnings and principles outlined for sharing clinical trial data.

Interventions to Improve Child Physical Activity in the Early Childhood Education and Care Setting: An Umbrella Review.

Early childhood education and care (ECEC) services are a key setting to support improvements in the physical activity of young children. This umbrella review gathered and synthesised systematic review evidence of the effectiveness of interventions in the ECEC setting on the physical activity levels of children aged 0-6. We also mapped the current evidence to the existing ECEC sector-specific physical activity practice recommendations. Five electronic databases were searched to identify systematic reviews that evaluated the impact of any ECEC-based interventions on the physical activity levels (e.g., moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, total physical activity) of children aged 0-6. One reviewer extracted data on intervention effectiveness and quality of the reviews, checked by a second reviewer. Ten reviews were included. Overall, the majority of the reviews found interventions delivered in ECEC improved child physical activity. Across reviews, the impact of six intervention strategies were identified, mapped to four (of eight) broad recommendations (i.e., providing opportunity, offering educator training, educators promoting the benefits of physical activity, creating a physical activity-promoting environment). The impact of the majority of recommendations, however, did not have systematic review evidence. Further investigation of the effectiveness of ECEC-based physical activity strategies is required to demonstrate support for the existing recommended practices.

Inside the waiting room: process drama and dramatic distancing for involving children in research on dental anxiety.

BACKGROUND: Dental anxiety in children is a major health concern. Process drama adopts distancing techniques that allow children to examine the possible causes of dental anxiety safely and with authority. Using this method to inform paediatric dentistry is novel and could be adopted in other fields where children experience health-related anxiety. METHODS: A 90-minute process drama workshop was conducted in three primary schools in Batley,West Yorkshire. Sixty-three children participated in the study. Sessions were audio-recorded, transcribed and thematic analysis conducted. RESULTS: Four key concepts emerged: 1) Fear of the unknown; 2) Unpleasant sensory experience; 3) Society's perception and portrayal of the dentist and 4) Learnt negative associations with the dentist. CONCLUSION: Process drama offers a novel approach to develop an understanding of dental anxiety in children. It elicits critical insights from a child's perspective and offers a participatory model for engaging children in health research on sensitive issues.

Feasibility of a Web-Based Implementation Intervention to Improve Child Dietary Intake in Early Childhood Education and Care: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, the implementation of evidence-based healthy eating policies and practices within early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings that encourage children's healthy diet is recommended. Despite the existence of evidence-based healthy eating practices, research indicates that current implementation rates are inadequate. Web-based approaches provide a potentially effective and less costly approach to support ECEC staff with implementing nutrition policies and practices. OBJECTIVE: The broad aim of this pilot randomized controlled trial is to assess the feasibility of assessing the impact of a web-based program together with health promotion officer (HPO) support on ECEC center implementation of healthy eating policies and practices. Specifically, we seek to describe the completion rate of study evaluation processes (participant consent and data collection rates); examine ECEC center uptake, acceptability, and appropriateness of the intervention and implementation strategies; understand the potential cost of delivering and receiving implementation support strategies; and describe the potential impact of the web-based intervention on the implementation of targeted healthy eating practices among centers in the intervention group. METHODS: A 6-month pilot implementation trial using a cluster-randomized controlled trial design was conducted in 22 ECEC centers within the Hunter New England region of New South Wales, Australia. Potentially eligible centers were distributed a recruitment package and telephoned by the research team to assess eligibility and obtain consent. Centers randomly allocated to the intervention group received access to a web-based program, together with HPO support (eg, educational outreach visit and local technical assistance) to implement 5 healthy eating practices. The web-based program incorporated audit with feedback, development of formal implementation blueprints, and educational materials to facilitate improvement in implementation. The centers allocated to the control group received the usual care. RESULTS: Of the 57 centers approached for the study, 22 (47%) provided consent to participate. Data collection components were completed by 100% (22/22) of the centers. High uptake for implementation strategies provided by HPOs (10/11, 91% to 11/11, 100%) and the web-based program (11/11, 100%) was observed. At follow-up, intervention centers had logged on to the program at an average of 5.18 (SD 2.52) times. The web-based program and implementation support strategies were highly acceptable (10/11, 91% to 11/11, 100%). Implementation of 4 healthy eating practices improved in the intervention group, ranging from 19% (2/11) to 64% (7/11). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides promising pilot data to warrant the conduct of a fully powered implementation trial to assess the impact of the program on ECEC healthy eating practice implementation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12619001158156; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=378099. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s40814-020-00707-w.